Is there an automatic principle that Medinan revelation may abrogate Meccan but not vice versa?
The concept of abrogation in Islamic jurisprudence is indeed a significant topic, especially regarding the revelations received in Mecca and Medina. The general principle often discussed is that revelations received in Medina, which are usually more detailed and legislative, can abrogate those received in Mecca, which tend to be more fundamental and spiritual.
The Qur'an itself addresses the subject of abrogation. For example, it states: Nothing of our revelation (even a single verse) do we abrogate or cause be forgotten, but we bring (in place) one better or the like thereof
2:106. This verse emphasizes Allah's authority in determining His revelations and suggests that the process of abrogation is within His divine wisdom. Tafsir Ibn Kathir explains that the main driving force behind Jewish disputes over abrogation stems from their disbelief, and it highlights the need for total submission to Allah's commands and the directives of His messengers.
Furthermore, another verse states: And when We put a revelation in place of (another) revelation, - and Allah knoweth best what He revealeth - they say: Lo! thou art but inventing
16:101. This again underscores the idea that abrogation is an established phenomenon in divine revelations, and it is a matter of Allah's will.
From the perspective of classical commentary, such as that in Al-Kafi, it is noted that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) would sometimes provide different answers to the same question at different times, indicating that some revelations abrogated others. This points to the notion that new legislation can supersede earlier commands, particularly when the context changes, as often reflected in the transition from Meccan to Medinan revelations.
In summary, while there is no explicit rule stated in the Qur'an that categorically states Medinan revelations may abrogate Meccan ones but not vice versa, the interpretations and scholarly consensus lean towards the understanding that Medinan verses, which often address more complex social and legal issues, have the authority to abrogate earlier Meccan verses.
Sources
-
2:106 · Al-Baqara
2:106 · Muhammad Marmaduke Pickthall
۞ مَا نَنسَخْ مِنْ ءَايَةٍ أَوْ نُنسِهَا نَأْتِ بِخَيْرٍۢ مِّنْهَآ أَوْ مِثْلِهَآ ۗ أَلَمْ تَعْلَمْ أَنَّ ٱللَّهَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَىْءٍۢ قَدِيرٌ
Nothing of our revelation (even a single verse) do we abrogate or cause be forgotten, but we bring (in place) one better or the like thereof. Knowest thou not that Allah is Able to do all things?
-
16:101 · An-Nahl
16:101 · Muhammad Marmaduke Pickthall
وَإِذَا بَدَّلْنَآ ءَايَةًۭ مَّكَانَ ءَايَةٍۢ ۙ وَٱللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا يُنَزِّلُ قَالُوٓا۟ إِنَّمَآ أَنتَ مُفْتَرٍۭ ۚ بَلْ أَكْثَرُهُمْ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ
And when We put a revelation in place of (another) revelation, - and Allah knoweth best what He revealeth - they say: Lo! thou art but inventing. Most of them know not.
-
Tafsir Ibn Kathir on 2:106
Tafsir Ibn Kathir · 2:106
Ibn Abi Talhah narrated from Ibn Abbas that the phrase "Whatever ayah We abrogate" means "whatever ayah We change or replace." Ibn Jurayj, quoting Mujahid, said it means "whatever ayah We erase." Ibn Abi Najih, also from Mujahid, explained that We keep the text of the ayah but change its ruling—a view also reported from the companions of Abdullah ibn Mas'ud. Ibn Abi Hatim transmitted similar interpretations from Abu al-'Aliyah and Muhammad ibn Ka'b al-Quradhi. Al-Dahhak interpreted "Whatever ayah We abrogate" as "We cancel it." Ata’ explained "Whatever ayah We abrogate" as meaning that it was left unrevealed to the Prophet ﷺ. Al-Suddi understood "abrogation" here as its withdrawal or removal, likening it to other Quranic expressions where something is lifted or taken away. Ibn Jarir (al-Tabari) gave a comprehensive explanation: abrogation involves transferring a ruling from one ayah to another, altering the legal or legislative status—what was lawful becoming prohibited and vice versa, permissions being restricted or allowed anew. This only applies to injunctions—commands, prohibitions, permissions—not to news or information within the Qur’an. The origin of the term is like that of copying a written book from one manuscript version to another, reflecting transfer and change. The scholars of usul al-fiqh differed in their phrasing of the limits of abrogation, but all agree the legal meaning is well known: to remove or lift a ruling by a later, authoritative proof. This includes the abrogation of a lighter ruling by a stricter one or the reverse; it is not abrogation if it simply changes without replacement. The detailed conditions and types of abrogation are extensively covered in Islamic legal theory. Al-Tabarani narrated an incident where two men read certain Surahs as taught by the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, but then one night they forgot some letters of it. They reported this to the Prophet ﷺ, who said, "That is among what has been abrogated and forgotten, so disregard it." Al-Zuhri would recite the verse as "Whatever ayah We abrogate or cause to be forgotten." Regarding the phrase "or cause to be forgotten," there are two main readings: one reading means we delay or defer certain rulings. Ali ibn Abi Talhah, from Ibn Abbas, explained this means not changing or replacing an ayah but leaving it unreplaced and preserved. Mujahid, citing companions of Ibn Mas’ud, said the text remains but the ruling is changed. Others like Ubayd ibn Umayr, Mujahid, 'Ata’, Atiyah al-Aufi, and Al-Suddi interpret this as delaying or postponing the ruling without abrogating it. Abd al-Razzaq narrated from Qatadah that God causes His Prophet to forget what He wills and abrogates as He wills. Ibn Jarir narrated Hassan’s view that the Prophet ﷺ was once given a Qur’an but then forgot it, as an example of this phenomenon. Ibn Abi Hatim transmitted from Ibn Abbas that Umar said this verse means delaying an ayah. On other recitations of "or We cause it to be forgotten," Qatadah said God caused the Prophet to forget what He willed and abrogated as He willed. Several early authorities, including Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abi Hatim, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and Bukhari, narrated that Umar said, "Ubayy reads to us, and Ali judges us; sometimes we do not transmit all that Ubayy says, but Ubayy said: I heard the Messenger of Allah ﷺ say something and will not abandon it for anything." This confirms the acceptance of abrogation in Qur’anic rulings. Regarding the phrase "We bring better than it or similar to it," Ibn Abbas explained that "better" means something more beneficial and gentler for the people. Abu al-'Aliyah explained it means We do not act on the abrogated ruling but may bring it back later or bring something similar. Al-Suddi said it means the replacement ruling is better than the abrogated or similar to what was left behind. Qatadah said it means an ayah containing easing, concession, command, and prohibition. The concluding verses affirm God's absolute power over everything, including the heavens and the earth. They underscore that no one besides God has authority or support. God is the creator and ruler who disposes of His creation as He wills, bringing happiness or hardship, health or sickness, support or withdrawal, as He pleases. Likewise, He legislates laws, abrogates some rulings, confirms others, and no one can oppose His judgment. People will be questioned for their actions;God remains beyond questioning. This passage responds especially to the Jews who denied abrogation of Torah rulings, refused to accept the prophethood of Jesus and Muhammad ﷺ, and objected to changes brought by these messengers. God reminds them that He possesses dominion over the heavens and earth, commands and prohibits as He wills, and can abrogate and substitute His own rulings. God's obedience is mandatory. Historical examples are provided, such as God ordering Abraham to sacrifice his son but then annulling the command before it was carried out, or commanding the Israelites to kill idolaters but later lifting that obligation. Ibn Kathir points out the disbelief and stubbornness among Jews regarding abrogation is unfounded rationally and contradicts the facts, since God rules as He wills and has changed laws before, including permitting things initially and later forbidding them or vice versa. The obligation to follow Muhammad's ﷺ final and perfect law is established with certainty. In summary, this verse teaches the legitimacy and necessity of abrogation in divine legislation, making clear God's sovereignty over all things and His exclusive right to change His laws with wisdom and mercy. It refutes objections to such changes and stresses total obedience to God's commands and His messengers.
Answers are generated and checked automatically; they may still be incomplete or imperfect. For religious rulings, consult a qualified scholar.
Ask your own question →